guildwarsfandomcom-20200222-history
Talk:Armor collectors
Collector item links I don't see a point in keeping links to things like Ebon Spider Legs. These items really don't have any use, and the only associated bit of data would be "Who drops it?" --Adam Skinner- That's what it is for, actually. Who drops it, where, what it's used for. Gravewit Yeah Yeah I just came to that conclusion myself. I was thinking about removing the links and putting the metadata there, but what to do in the case where the item is dropped by a "Class" of mob (eg Shiverpeak *). Links should be fine, in that case. Adam.skinner I think as i mentioned on Talk:Bestiary i would rather have a lot of small pages than one large list that becomes unmanageable. thats my own opinion anyway. but i think in certain circumstances large lists are unavoidable... i dont know if it can be avoided here, but i suspect it can be. as a sidenote, standard item articles could link to crafting material/rare crafting material that they produce. - LordBiro Yar. Gravewit re: Biro's sidenote: yes! VERY useful, especially when you head to a new area and start getting new salvage drops. I tend to need a lot of wood planks (for Necromancer and Monk tattoos), and since salvage kits cost money, it's generally not worth it for me to break down every item; I sell the stuff I know doesn't give me planks. The other day I accidentally salvaged a Summit Axe.. and got planks from it. A lot of axes are iron =/ But I've just been sellin' 'em off for a week or two now. Same with the Summit Badges (which I'd think would be iron or granite, but noooo). Some staves are wood, others are bone or iron.. so yeah. Having a little thing that says what its core component is for each item (including collector-drops) would be -really- useful. Nunix Plural or Singular? I see an inconsistancy in our linking for collector items. Should we use plural or singular? I lean towards plural myself. Yeah, i agree with plural. In the game it tends to use the plural for items as well, such as Scales as opposed to Scale. I suppose it depends on the item, but I think that we should stick to plural for consistency and have redirects if someone puts in a singular name. - LordBiro Migration of items This page will be depreciated in favor or Category:Collector Armor. A guide for migration is the Post-searing ascalon collector items listed on this page. Adam I think this migration has made the site harder to use. What we really want is some sort of cross referencing where the items are listed with links to the collectors and the collectors listed with a link to the item. At the moment the collector information is on the item page which I think is the wrong place for it. This page is now hard to use as I can't simply scan it to find the location of the items I want - i.e. pants armor 27. I think we should at least make each line on this page have some extra summary information. Kris e.g. Innis The White: Collects Singed Gargoyle Skulls for Arms with armor 21/?/41 :Yeah, I see your point. I'm not sure of the best way to arrange it though. If I understand correctly, you think we should have seperate Armor Collector, Collector Item and Armor categories (which is always good) and then have seperate pages which reference who has what. This might be a good idea, because I am starting to get quite confused by the Armor Collectors/Collector Armor pages! - LordBiro/Talk 21:43, 25 May 2005 (EST) :Yeah, I'm trying to figure out how to approach it. I don't really want to duplicate data by putting it in 2 places (a consolidated area, which is what I figure categories are for), plus you lose some important data that way (bonuses for headgear, mostly). If we are going to replicate it, I think we should have those geographically based pages, with core data only (collector item, armor slot, caster/ranger/warrior AF). It's good to be able to say: "Hey, I've got 5 of these Bleached Carapaces, who wants them?", but also you'd like to look at it like: "Man, I've got 21AF armor on my legs and no cash to purchase new stuff. What do I need to try and get for my new armor?" I haven't been able to figure out a way to do both without replicating data. Wiki's don't include a SQL interface, do they? Now that would be awesome. Adam :Yeah - its all about how we want to use the site. Usually I think what do I need for this armor. The problem is that we can't store the data in a wiki in a data centric fashion as you say - well not that I know of. Otherwise we'd store it once and create different views of it.Kris ::Maybe we can alter it completely... What if every collector who wants Fetid Carapices was in the Fetid Carapices Category? And every collector giving a certain type of armor was in the Certain Type of Armor Category? And then you have Fetid Carapices Category in Category:Collector Items... maybe an example would be better ;) (I just like drawing diagrams of categories in case you hadn't noticed, lol) + Category:Items | +--+ Category:Collector Items (contains any items that can be used by collectors as subcategories) | | | +--+ Category:Fetid Carapices (contains all collectors who want fetid carapices, and a link to the article Fetid Carapices which might also link to Collector 1 and Armor A) | | | | | +--+ Collector 1 (links to armor A) | | | +--+ Category:Stormy Eyes | | | +--+ Collector 2 (links to armor B) | +--+ Category:Armor (contains all armor definitions) | +--+ Category:Collector Armor (contains only armor from collectors) | +--+ Armor A (links to collector 1) | + Armor B (links to collector 2) ::This way, if you want a certain type of armor, you look in Category:Collector Armor, if you want to know what you can do with your surplus of Fetid Carapices you look in Category:Fetid Carapices, and equally another category could exist that groups all of the Collectors together, and has a subcategory of Armor Collectors, which can be browsed if you just want to look at which armor collectors are where. - LordBiro/Talk 23:16, 25 May 2005 (EST) ::: Sorry I'm so late to the party on this. Been having connection troubles. You guys are doing great work, by the way. 128 articles! Who'd have thunk it. Anyway, RE: Adam asking about SQL queries, actually I'm a PHP/mySQL programmer myself, and I considered building a big-ass tool for things like that. But the sheer amount of work it would take sort of put me off. I could make a back end for it and give it a try pretty quickly. There's also a setting I can switch on in MediaWiki to allow SQL queries right in the wiki, but I'm not sure I trust it in the name of security, you know? Gravewit 03:09, 26 May 2005 (EST) ::::I hadn't noticed the question about using SQL... Even if we did have the functionality of SQL queries in our searches, I don't think there are many users who can write a well-formed SQL query to find the information they need ;) LordBiro/Talk 07:29, 26 May 2005 (EST) ::::I use Sybase and Oracle myself at work (I administer a web application at a bank and often do ad-hoc queries or write stored procedures). Perhaps we can create a schema for this purpose. It'd be sweet to allow SQL queries in the Wiki, and combine that with templates somehow. What would be the downside to allowing select queries? I wonder if we can protect the user tables that store the passwords etc. Adam :::::Hehe, I personally think this is over-complicating the problem... That's my opinion anyway :) - LordBiro/Talk 03:16, 27 May 2005 (EST)